“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” – Samuel Adams

Now I know Al Gore has told us that the science of global warming is “settled” and that there is “consensus” in the scientific community about his religion, er, science. But such assertions are just a few light-years off from the truth.

Dr. Roy Spencer is a former NASA climate scientist, and he says the push for the cap and trade global warming tax is more about grabbing power than responding to science.

Dr. Spencer is a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville and leads the advanced science team monitoring the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA’s Aqua satellite, which monitors global climate fluctuations.

Spencer won’t go as far as I and many others will and say that the whole hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming is a hoax; he believes his AGW-believing peers are sincere, but confused about the science. But even so, Spencer isn’t buying the predictions of climate doom being foisted by the socialists pushing climate legislation.

He says carbon dioxide emissions caused by human activity have a very small impact on overall global climate. Instead, he says carbon dioxide is essential for life because plants use it for photosynthesis, which makes it essential for the rest of the food chain including humans.

“Our latest modeling and information, and satellite data suggests that the clouds are going to act in such a way to reduce the little bit of CO2 warming even more,” Spencer tells Newsmax.TV.

Spencer draws an analogy between global climate fluctuations and what happens when people roll down their car windows to let heat escape on a hot summer day. The prevailing view suggests the planet’s climate system keeps the Earth’s windows rolled up trapping heat and increasing global temperatures, but Spencer says evidence shows otherwise.

Dr. Spencer even says human contributions to CO2 in the atmosphere may actually be beneficial, since plant life needs CO2 to live and thrive, and humans and animals need plants to thrive in order for our survival. I seem to recall something about this in grade-school science, but perhaps Al Gore and some of these scientists were out sick that day.

Spencer says some researchers have been confused about cause and effect, and that’s pretty clear. The science actually shows that over the many rises and falls in temperature over earth’s history, CO2 increases follow temperature increases rather than drive them. The correlation with solar activity is also strong, even though it is obviously hard for some people to acknowledge that the star in the middle of our solar system burning at 11,000 degrees actually influences temperature on earth.

He also confirms what many of us have long known: the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established for political reasons, and is a political body. It is no wonder that their reports are embarassingly full of holes, and that their head Dr Rajendra Pachauri doesn’t even seem to believe in AGW himself.

We should not even remotely think of buying into this silly hypothesis and scuttling our freedom and prosperity with things like the cap and trade global warming tax.